Happy Halloween!
The Top 3 Halloween songs/videos of All-Time
3. Monster Mash by Bobby "Boris" Pickett and the Cryptkeepers...or maybe you'd prefer instead a version by The Misfits:
2. Dead Man's Party by Oingo Boingo
1. Thriller by Michael Jackson:
Friday, October 31, 2008
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Is it okay to cite religion as a reason to deny equal rights to homosexuals?
I appreciate the honesty in the answer from John Edwards. He sees the difference between his faith and his social policies:
Saturday morning I will be posting my last Proposition 8 blog...
Saturday morning I will be posting my last Proposition 8 blog...
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Prop 8 people...help me understand.
YES on Prop 8 people, I need some help understanding something...
If you continue to use the argument that homosexual domestic partnerships already have access to every right as heterosexual married partners which includes the priviliges of adoption...
Can someone please explain to me then how you are "protecting the children" and "defending the sanctity of marriage?" By not allowing homosexuals to use the name title "Marriage"?
If all actions remain the same but you just can't say the word marriage, how does a Yes on 8 vote accomplish anything?
Everything that is already happening will continue to occur, but as long as it is not called marriage, everyone is safe?
To me, it seems like Daniel Webster is funding the Yes on Prop 8 campaign because I see NOTHING that changes with a yes vote except a dictionary definition of a term...
And the involuntary divorces of thousands of committed couples.
If you continue to use the argument that homosexual domestic partnerships already have access to every right as heterosexual married partners which includes the priviliges of adoption...
Can someone please explain to me then how you are "protecting the children" and "defending the sanctity of marriage?" By not allowing homosexuals to use the name title "Marriage"?
If all actions remain the same but you just can't say the word marriage, how does a Yes on 8 vote accomplish anything?
Everything that is already happening will continue to occur, but as long as it is not called marriage, everyone is safe?
To me, it seems like Daniel Webster is funding the Yes on Prop 8 campaign because I see NOTHING that changes with a yes vote except a dictionary definition of a term...
And the involuntary divorces of thousands of committed couples.
Monday, October 27, 2008
Law Professors Clash Over Gay Marriage, Churches' Tax-Exempt Status
(You can also read this article at it's source: http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202425139380#
Supporters of a constitutional ban on gay marriage released their second television ad Wednesday featuring a Pepperdine University School of Law professor offering disputed predictions about what will happen if Proposition 8 fails.
The commercial depicts a pig-tailed girl excitedly telling her horrified mother how she learned in school "that a prince can marry a prince and I can marry a princess." Richard Peterson then appears on screen.
"Think it can't happen?" the assistant professor asks. "It's already happened" in Massachusetts, the first state to legalize same-sex marriages, Peterson says. An unseen narrator then warns parents that they'll be legally helpless to keep the topic of gay marriage out of California's public school curricula if Prop 8 fails.
Hilary McLean, spokeswoman for California's superintendent of schools, Jack O'Connell, said the ad's claims are false.
"There's nothing in the Education Code that requires schools to teach about marriage," McLean said. In schools that do provide instruction about marriage, locally elected school boards determine the content, she said.
The ad is similar to one released last week that shows May 2008 footage of a giddy San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom telling a supportive crowd that gay marriage "is gonna happen whether you like it or not." The spot also features Peterson repeating the claim about gay marriage being taught in schools and warning that churches could lose their tax-exempt status for opposing same-sex unions.
But the author of a newspaper op-ed cited in the ad as the basis for Peterson's comments said the pro-Prop 8 campaign "completely distorted" his position.
"I never, ever, ever said anything about if churches do not perform same-sex marriages that you'll lose your tax-exempt status," said Robert DeKoven, a professor at California Western School of Law in San Diego. DeKoven's commentary in the July 3 edition of the Gay & Lesbian Times argues that it's unfair to give tax breaks to politically active religious institutions but not to individual activists and donors.
DeKoven said he was never contacted by the Yes on 8 campaign or Peterson.
"Frankly I'm shocked that he would be involved in a political commercial with such distortions in it," DeKoven said.
Ellen Aprill, a tax law professor at Loyola Law School, called Peterson's claim "a bit of fear mongering." Challenges to a church's tax-exempt status based solely on its stance on gay marriage would probably not survive in federal or state courts, she said.
"We have many places where we recognize religious organizations' right to free expression," Aprill said.
Peterson, listed on Pepperdine's Web site as director of the school's Special Education Advocacy Clinic, did not return a phone message left Wednesday. Neither did two spokesmen in the university's media relations department.
After the first commercial aired, campus officials reportedly asked the Yes on 8 campaign to remove Peterson's Pepperdine affiliation from the ad. An unsigned statement on the school's Web site says the school "remains neutral" on political candidates or initiatives.
The latest ad again identifies Peterson as a Pepperdine University School of Law professor, although a smaller font of script says his title is used "for identification purposes only."
A Yes on 8 spokesman said the spots are being aired statewide.
Expect to see more television ads debating Prop 8 in the next four weeks. Initiative supporters say they have raised more than $25 million for their campaign. Prop 8 opponents reported contributions totaling more than $16 million through Sept. 30, according to state records.
A Field poll on Sept. 18 showed that 55 percent of likely voters intended to vote no. But a SurveyUSA poll released Oct. 6 showed that 47 percent of respondents support Prop 8 while 42 percent are opposed.
Supporters of a constitutional ban on gay marriage released their second television ad Wednesday featuring a Pepperdine University School of Law professor offering disputed predictions about what will happen if Proposition 8 fails.
The commercial depicts a pig-tailed girl excitedly telling her horrified mother how she learned in school "that a prince can marry a prince and I can marry a princess." Richard Peterson then appears on screen.
"Think it can't happen?" the assistant professor asks. "It's already happened" in Massachusetts, the first state to legalize same-sex marriages, Peterson says. An unseen narrator then warns parents that they'll be legally helpless to keep the topic of gay marriage out of California's public school curricula if Prop 8 fails.
Hilary McLean, spokeswoman for California's superintendent of schools, Jack O'Connell, said the ad's claims are false.
"There's nothing in the Education Code that requires schools to teach about marriage," McLean said. In schools that do provide instruction about marriage, locally elected school boards determine the content, she said.
The ad is similar to one released last week that shows May 2008 footage of a giddy San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom telling a supportive crowd that gay marriage "is gonna happen whether you like it or not." The spot also features Peterson repeating the claim about gay marriage being taught in schools and warning that churches could lose their tax-exempt status for opposing same-sex unions.
But the author of a newspaper op-ed cited in the ad as the basis for Peterson's comments said the pro-Prop 8 campaign "completely distorted" his position.
"I never, ever, ever said anything about if churches do not perform same-sex marriages that you'll lose your tax-exempt status," said Robert DeKoven, a professor at California Western School of Law in San Diego. DeKoven's commentary in the July 3 edition of the Gay & Lesbian Times argues that it's unfair to give tax breaks to politically active religious institutions but not to individual activists and donors.
DeKoven said he was never contacted by the Yes on 8 campaign or Peterson.
"Frankly I'm shocked that he would be involved in a political commercial with such distortions in it," DeKoven said.
Ellen Aprill, a tax law professor at Loyola Law School, called Peterson's claim "a bit of fear mongering." Challenges to a church's tax-exempt status based solely on its stance on gay marriage would probably not survive in federal or state courts, she said.
"We have many places where we recognize religious organizations' right to free expression," Aprill said.
Peterson, listed on Pepperdine's Web site as director of the school's Special Education Advocacy Clinic, did not return a phone message left Wednesday. Neither did two spokesmen in the university's media relations department.
After the first commercial aired, campus officials reportedly asked the Yes on 8 campaign to remove Peterson's Pepperdine affiliation from the ad. An unsigned statement on the school's Web site says the school "remains neutral" on political candidates or initiatives.
The latest ad again identifies Peterson as a Pepperdine University School of Law professor, although a smaller font of script says his title is used "for identification purposes only."
A Yes on 8 spokesman said the spots are being aired statewide.
Expect to see more television ads debating Prop 8 in the next four weeks. Initiative supporters say they have raised more than $25 million for their campaign. Prop 8 opponents reported contributions totaling more than $16 million through Sept. 30, according to state records.
A Field poll on Sept. 18 showed that 55 percent of likely voters intended to vote no. But a SurveyUSA poll released Oct. 6 showed that 47 percent of respondents support Prop 8 while 42 percent are opposed.
Sunday, October 26, 2008
Wickedness Never Was Happiness...
Mormon donations to the Proposition 8 campaign are nearing the $10 million mark. Although the church, as an organization, has not contributed, nor have any individuals in the governing LDS leadership, these donations from church members have tremendously helped the Yes on 8 campaign in their goal to legislate the definition of marriage as between "one man and one woman." LDS Church leaders have decided to step across the sometimes murky line between politics and religion because the Church sees this as a moral issue for which they must take a stand.
So I ask all of those who have donated money to the cause: When you see the blatant lies being used in television ads that you paid for...does it pain you to know you funded immoral behaviors and the direct breaking of the 9th commandment?
When you see that you have funded blackmail and extortion attempts, does it cause your bosom to burn with joy and pride?
How do you feel to know that your money pays for ads that spread lies to the point that the California State Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell expressed his strong opposition to Prop 8 in a hard-hitting TV ad, emphatically reminding voters that "our schools aren't required to teach anything about marriage." In fact, every education authority in the state has rejected the lies and distortions of the Prop 8 campaign, including the California Teachers Association and the California School Boards Association.
When you profess to stand on the moral high road and legislate your moral code as social policy, is it not then boldly Pharisaic to break that very same code to force your agenda upon others?
Do you find happiness in the immorality that you are funding?
So I ask all of those who have donated money to the cause: When you see the blatant lies being used in television ads that you paid for...does it pain you to know you funded immoral behaviors and the direct breaking of the 9th commandment?
When you see that you have funded blackmail and extortion attempts, does it cause your bosom to burn with joy and pride?
How do you feel to know that your money pays for ads that spread lies to the point that the California State Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell expressed his strong opposition to Prop 8 in a hard-hitting TV ad, emphatically reminding voters that "our schools aren't required to teach anything about marriage." In fact, every education authority in the state has rejected the lies and distortions of the Prop 8 campaign, including the California Teachers Association and the California School Boards Association.
When you profess to stand on the moral high road and legislate your moral code as social policy, is it not then boldly Pharisaic to break that very same code to force your agenda upon others?
Do you find happiness in the immorality that you are funding?
Friday, October 24, 2008
Prop 8: Queen of the "What If" arguments...
Agnes Repplier, a turn-of-the-century essayist, once penned: “Humor brings insight and tolerance. Irony brings a deeper and less friendly understanding.” My goal is that the reader may learn in humor and spare themselves the bruises of irony. Those in favor of passing California Proposition 8 have been using "What If" persuasion tactics since the beginning to try and garner voters to their side. We can't let it pass because what if this happens. Or if we let gays marry then this will happen. Well this is my ode to the ultimate "What If" scenario.
WHAT IF Prop 8 does pass? WHAT IF the voters do ultimately choose to discriminate against a fractional percentage of the citizenry and the current right of same sex marriage is taken away? WHAT IF the issue then goes to a higher court? California would be at an impasse between what the majority of citizens want and what the state supreme court deemed legal. An appeal to a higher court would be the logical next step. Let's say it actually does make it's way to the final court, the highest court, the grand-daddy of them all, the United States Supreme Court.
Now here is where you need to pay close attention. WHAT IF the US Supreme Court agrees with the absurd idea that we cannot treat one citizen different from another citizen and WHAT IF they choose to sustain the decisions reached by the Supreme Courts of California, Massachusetts, and Connecticut? WHAT IF they rule that the federal government must either allow marriage for all or dissolve the institution of marriage altogether and call government regulated social contracts something entirely different altogther? WHAT IF they just leave marriage for the religions. I mean, after all, it is a religious institution. The LDS proclamation on the family says "that marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God."
WHAT IF they rule that everyone must come to the government for a civil union or a domestic partnership in place of civil marriages? I mean, all we keep hearing from the YES on Prop 8 campaigners is how it is just as good as marriage. Well, now they will get to have it. And if they want a "marriage ceremony" they can go to their respective churches and religions.
Now, and I know this is absolute crazy talk but stay with me, WHAT IF all of the zealous religionists who have fought the good fight to preserve the sanctity of marriage ultimately destroy our nation's definition of marriage as the fundamental unit of society simply because they were afraid that an infinitesimal fraction of a percentage point of vile heathen sinners would dare to defile and destroy the sanctity of marriage by entering into a contract of love and commitment?
WHAT IF it is organized religion that ultimately destroys the sanctity of marriage instead of homosexual mimicry? Oh, the sweet pangs of irony.
WHAT IF Prop 8 does pass? WHAT IF the voters do ultimately choose to discriminate against a fractional percentage of the citizenry and the current right of same sex marriage is taken away? WHAT IF the issue then goes to a higher court? California would be at an impasse between what the majority of citizens want and what the state supreme court deemed legal. An appeal to a higher court would be the logical next step. Let's say it actually does make it's way to the final court, the highest court, the grand-daddy of them all, the United States Supreme Court.
Now here is where you need to pay close attention. WHAT IF the US Supreme Court agrees with the absurd idea that we cannot treat one citizen different from another citizen and WHAT IF they choose to sustain the decisions reached by the Supreme Courts of California, Massachusetts, and Connecticut? WHAT IF they rule that the federal government must either allow marriage for all or dissolve the institution of marriage altogether and call government regulated social contracts something entirely different altogther? WHAT IF they just leave marriage for the religions. I mean, after all, it is a religious institution. The LDS proclamation on the family says "that marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God."
WHAT IF they rule that everyone must come to the government for a civil union or a domestic partnership in place of civil marriages? I mean, all we keep hearing from the YES on Prop 8 campaigners is how it is just as good as marriage. Well, now they will get to have it. And if they want a "marriage ceremony" they can go to their respective churches and religions.
Now, and I know this is absolute crazy talk but stay with me, WHAT IF all of the zealous religionists who have fought the good fight to preserve the sanctity of marriage ultimately destroy our nation's definition of marriage as the fundamental unit of society simply because they were afraid that an infinitesimal fraction of a percentage point of vile heathen sinners would dare to defile and destroy the sanctity of marriage by entering into a contract of love and commitment?
WHAT IF it is organized religion that ultimately destroys the sanctity of marriage instead of homosexual mimicry? Oh, the sweet pangs of irony.
TJ's Friday Halloween Countdown...part III
With only one week left until Halloween, it would be criminal not to have included footage of Alice Cooper rocking Wayne-n-Garth style with "Feed My Frankenstein":
And here's an oldie but goodie...
Fresh Prince - Nightmare on my Street:
And here's an oldie but goodie...
Fresh Prince - Nightmare on my Street:
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Monday, October 20, 2008
CA Prop 8: Fact and Fiction
Facts v. Fiction
Proposition 8 would put discrimination into our Constitution. It would inject government into private lives. It undermines equal protections under our laws.
Here’s what’s fiction and what’s fact:
Fiction: Prop 8 doesn’t discriminate against gays.
Fact: Prop 8 is simple: it eliminates the rights for same-sex couples to marry. Prop 8 would deny equal protections and write discrimination against one group of people—lesbian and gay people—into our state constitution.
Fiction: Teaching children about same-sex marriage will happen here unless we pass Prop 8.
Fact: Not one word in Prop 8 mentions education, and no child can be forced, against the will of their parents, to be taught anything about health and family issues at school. California law prohibits it, and the Yes on 8 campaign knows they are lying. Sacramento Superior Court Judge Timothy Frawley has already ruled that this claim by Prop 8 proponents is “false and misleading.” The Orange County Register, traditionally one of the most conservative newspapers in the state, says this claim is false. So do lawyers for the California Department of Education.
Fiction: Churches could lose their tax-exemption status.
Fact: Nothing in Prop 8 would force churches to do anything. In fact, the court decision regarding marriage specifically says “no religion will be required to change its religious policies or practices with regard to same-sex couples, and no religious officiant will be required to solemnize a marriage in contravention of his or her religious beliefs.”
Fiction: A Massachusetts case about a parent’s objection to the school curriculum will happen here.
Fact: Unlike Massachusetts, California gives parents an absolute right to remove their kids and opt-out of teaching on health and family instruction they don’t agree with. The opponents know that California law already covers this and Prop 8 won’t affect it, so they bring up an irrelevant case in Massachusetts.
Fiction: Four Activist Judges in San Francisco…
Fact: Prop 8 is not about courts and judges, it’s about eliminating a fundamental right. Judges didn’t grant the right, the constitution guarantees the right. Proponents of Prop 8 use an outdated and stale argument that judges aren’t supposed to protect rights and freedoms. This campaign is about whether Californians, right now, in 2008 are willing to amend the constitution for the sole purpose of eliminating a fundamental right for one group of citizens.
Fiction: People can be sued over personal beliefs.
Fact: California’s laws already prohibit discrimination against anyone based on race, religion, gender, or sexual orientation. This has nothing to do with marriage.
Fiction: Pepperdine University supports the Yes on 8 campaign.
Fact: The university has publicly disassociated itself from Professor Richard Peterson of Pepperdine University, who is featured in the ad, and has asked to not be identified in the Yes on 8 advertisements.
Fiction: Unless Prop 8 passes, CA parents won’t have the right to object to what their children are taught in school.
Fact: California law clearly gives parents and guardians broad authority to remove their children from any health instruction if it conflicts with their religious beliefs or moral convictions.
Sunday, October 19, 2008
Saturday, October 18, 2008
A comical break from serious politics...
Both of the candidates attended the Alfred E. Smith Memorial Foundation Dinner and were the entertainment for the evening. I haven't laughed like this since the glory days of 90's SNL.
McCain roasts Obama...
Obama roasts McCain...
McCain roasts Obama...
Obama roasts McCain...
Friday, October 17, 2008
TJ's Friday Halloween Countdown...part II
Continuing the Halloween Countdown comes this little gem from Crispin Glover (Back to the Future, Willard). This is utterly creepy.
Okay...I can't send you away scratching your heads and trying to figure that out...so go away on a happy note with this. I don't know if it is a Halloween moment per se, but it is part of who I am to try and fit a little bit of Ghostbusters in anywhere I can:
Ghostbusters by Ray Parker Jr.
Clowny Clown Clown
Okay...I can't send you away scratching your heads and trying to figure that out...so go away on a happy note with this. I don't know if it is a Halloween moment per se, but it is part of who I am to try and fit a little bit of Ghostbusters in anywhere I can:
Ghostbusters by Ray Parker Jr.
Thursday, October 16, 2008
LDS Doctrinal Question...participation required!
I have a simple question that I want to know how the blogging world responds.
When does a Prophet speak as a Prophet?
When does a Prophet speak as a Prophet?
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
Heidi and Scott (I hate you both) love my blog...
Heidi and Kielbasa said they love my blog and asked me to do this!
1. Where is your cell phone? In my pocket.
2. Where is your significant other? Feeding Caleb on the living room sofa.
3. Your hair color? Auburn
4. Your mother? If she's crazy it's partly my fault.
5. Your father? My Pops...the fisherman.
6. Your favorite thing? My family.
7. Your dream last night? We cannot be held accountable for our dreams...lol...
8. Your dream/goal? To become a best-selling author.
9. The room you're in? Bedroom
10. Your hobby? Reading, fantasy sports, comic collecting, hiking.
11. Your fear? To march and suffer...
12. Where do you want to be in 6 years? Somewhere where I own a home.
13. Where were you last night? Sleeping...
14. What you're not? Without reason
15. One of your wish-list items? ipod
16. Where you grew up? Ontario, California
17. The last thing you ate? Blueberry bagel with honey butter.
18. What are you wearing? A pimp blue jumpsuit
19. Your TV? My iMac.
20. Your pet? Hannah, Adam and Caleb...
21. Your computer? iMac
22. Your mood? Chill
23. Missing someone? Waldo...
24. Your car? 2007 Toyota Camry
25. Something you're not wearing? A dress
26. Favorite store? Hands down...REI.
27. Your summer? Just like Spring, Winter and Autumn.
28. Love someone? And some more than others. Love you nic.
29. Your favorite color? Purple and Gold...Go Lakers!
30. When is the last time you laughed? Hourly.
31. Last time you cried? June 17, 2008. Game 6 of the NBA Finals...
I choose to subject this upon: NOBODY.
1. Where is your cell phone? In my pocket.
2. Where is your significant other? Feeding Caleb on the living room sofa.
3. Your hair color? Auburn
4. Your mother? If she's crazy it's partly my fault.
5. Your father? My Pops...the fisherman.
6. Your favorite thing? My family.
7. Your dream last night? We cannot be held accountable for our dreams...lol...
8. Your dream/goal? To become a best-selling author.
9. The room you're in? Bedroom
10. Your hobby? Reading, fantasy sports, comic collecting, hiking.
11. Your fear? To march and suffer...
12. Where do you want to be in 6 years? Somewhere where I own a home.
13. Where were you last night? Sleeping...
14. What you're not? Without reason
15. One of your wish-list items? ipod
16. Where you grew up? Ontario, California
17. The last thing you ate? Blueberry bagel with honey butter.
18. What are you wearing? A pimp blue jumpsuit
19. Your TV? My iMac.
20. Your pet? Hannah, Adam and Caleb...
21. Your computer? iMac
22. Your mood? Chill
23. Missing someone? Waldo...
24. Your car? 2007 Toyota Camry
25. Something you're not wearing? A dress
26. Favorite store? Hands down...REI.
27. Your summer? Just like Spring, Winter and Autumn.
28. Love someone? And some more than others. Love you nic.
29. Your favorite color? Purple and Gold...Go Lakers!
30. When is the last time you laughed? Hourly.
31. Last time you cried? June 17, 2008. Game 6 of the NBA Finals...
I choose to subject this upon: NOBODY.
Friday, October 10, 2008
TJ's Friday Halloween Countdown...part I
With four Friday's left until Halloween, stay tuned each week for a creepy crawly posting each Friday until the grim day.
Here is a fan-created Halloween video featuring the Oingo Boingo classic "No One Live Forever."
Here is a fan-created Halloween video featuring the Oingo Boingo classic "No One Live Forever."
Sunday, October 5, 2008
Fallen Angel - book review
Fallen Angel by Peter DavidMy review
rating: 4 of 5 stars
Imagine this combination: If the Punisher was a woman with mystical powers set in the darkest times of Gotham City...that would be Fallen Angel.
View all my reviews.
Saturday, October 4, 2008
Proposition 8
I was recently sent this video about California Proposition 8 and thought I would share it with you. I'll be as fair and balanced as Fox News I assure you.
I can appreciate and see the fear in the eyes of those who believe homosexuality is learned and not inherited or born with. And as such I applaud the man for standing up for what he perceives an unrighteous brainwashing of his child. I don't have an answer for when we should begin to implement real world examples to our children. Obviously, Maloy children (Payson, Utah) will be less likely to encounter social differences being in the predominately white middle class Mormon socio-culture. That's okay.
Shelby children (San Diego, CA) currently experience something different, not better or worse, just real world different. Hannah is the only Mormon in her class and is one of two or three white kids. There is a significant Muslim population locally with children who attend the school and the majority of students are Hispanic with a roughly 2 to 1 ratio of parents (a rough estimate) that prefer English to Spanish. I'm okay with diversity. I speak Spanish, I work in Mexico. I'd like to live in Utah for it's relatively lower cost of living...but I digress.
Diversity exists outside of our infinitesimal Mormon subculture here in America. 13 million members worldwide, less than half in the United States. Mormons make up 2.1% of US citizens. As of 1990 we had 533,741 member in California (http://www.adherents.com/largecom/com_lds.html). I will grant a high estimate and say that number has doubled. 1.07 million members in California but 50% activity and we're back to 533,741 active members in a state of 36.5 million (http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0004986.html).
We make up 1.4% of the population in California (or 2.8% if you include all the inactive members) and are trying to implement our social and moral code upon the other 97.2 to 98.6%. Who is the minority trying to push their agenda now?
Talking about real world situations is not the end of the world. Sarah Palin was taught science in high school but her religious convictions still allow here to believe dinosaurs walked the earth 6,000 years ago and she could be the first woman Vice-President. Satanic teachings on evolution and archaeology had no effect on her despite evidence after evidence placed before her. So come one religionists, don't sell tradition short. If Sarah Palin can deny evidence with faith, so can your children. Homosexuals aren't born gay. Have faith that your children will follow the truth. Righteous brainwashing (aka: teaching your children correct moral principles) can still occur after children have been exposed to elements outside their core belief system. It requires parents to be parents and take responsibility for their upbringing of their children.
However, if it is in the school curriculum to discuss family dynamics and there are children that have inter-racial, single-parent, gay, adoptive, living with grand-parents or other family not an immediate parent...those discussions should probably occur WITHOUT the fear of ridicule or embarrassment in school setting. Let the child go to church to realize how their home-life is an abomination in the eyes of God, not school. Let those trying to teach the message of the merciful loving Christ be the ones to cast the first stone.
I can appreciate and see the fear in the eyes of those who believe homosexuality is learned and not inherited or born with. And as such I applaud the man for standing up for what he perceives an unrighteous brainwashing of his child. I don't have an answer for when we should begin to implement real world examples to our children. Obviously, Maloy children (Payson, Utah) will be less likely to encounter social differences being in the predominately white middle class Mormon socio-culture. That's okay.
Shelby children (San Diego, CA) currently experience something different, not better or worse, just real world different. Hannah is the only Mormon in her class and is one of two or three white kids. There is a significant Muslim population locally with children who attend the school and the majority of students are Hispanic with a roughly 2 to 1 ratio of parents (a rough estimate) that prefer English to Spanish. I'm okay with diversity. I speak Spanish, I work in Mexico. I'd like to live in Utah for it's relatively lower cost of living...but I digress.
Diversity exists outside of our infinitesimal Mormon subculture here in America. 13 million members worldwide, less than half in the United States. Mormons make up 2.1% of US citizens. As of 1990 we had 533,741 member in California (http://www.adherents.com/largecom/com_lds.html). I will grant a high estimate and say that number has doubled. 1.07 million members in California but 50% activity and we're back to 533,741 active members in a state of 36.5 million (http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0004986.html).
We make up 1.4% of the population in California (or 2.8% if you include all the inactive members) and are trying to implement our social and moral code upon the other 97.2 to 98.6%. Who is the minority trying to push their agenda now?
Talking about real world situations is not the end of the world. Sarah Palin was taught science in high school but her religious convictions still allow here to believe dinosaurs walked the earth 6,000 years ago and she could be the first woman Vice-President. Satanic teachings on evolution and archaeology had no effect on her despite evidence after evidence placed before her. So come one religionists, don't sell tradition short. If Sarah Palin can deny evidence with faith, so can your children. Homosexuals aren't born gay. Have faith that your children will follow the truth. Righteous brainwashing (aka: teaching your children correct moral principles) can still occur after children have been exposed to elements outside their core belief system. It requires parents to be parents and take responsibility for their upbringing of their children.
However, if it is in the school curriculum to discuss family dynamics and there are children that have inter-racial, single-parent, gay, adoptive, living with grand-parents or other family not an immediate parent...those discussions should probably occur WITHOUT the fear of ridicule or embarrassment in school setting. Let the child go to church to realize how their home-life is an abomination in the eyes of God, not school. Let those trying to teach the message of the merciful loving Christ be the ones to cast the first stone.
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Scrubs - One of my favorite shows of all time
One of my favorite shows of all time is nearing the end. NBC dropped them and even though ABC did pick them up, they are being tossed into the mid-season line up not the fall prime-time line up. The end is imminent. So on that note, I wanted to show some funny clips. Out of a list of like 60...here is the best of the best. Enjoy!
My all-time favorite moment from Scrubs:
Poison:
Black People at the Movies:
Carla:
Sex Dance:
The Babysitter:
My all-time favorite moment from Scrubs:
Poison:
Black People at the Movies:
Carla:
Sex Dance:
The Babysitter:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)